#BTColumn – Coping with the fallout

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed by the author(s) do not represent the official position of Barbados TODAY.

By Dennis DePezia

Leaders are expected to direct or determine the vision of the organisation and to spearhead its action. In comparison, management is charged with the responsibility of planning and controlling the work process. This basically means that management has to maintain systems and processes. The commonality which both leaders and management personnel share, simply boils down to that of being held accountable.

It is generally accepted that in the launching of any initiative, the possibility exists that mistakes can be made and failure may result. In either instance, it requires that leaders and managers would stand up and accept responsibility for any mistakes or subsequent failure. By adopting this approach, it can make a difference in the defining of what is excusable and what is inexcusable in addressing the fallout from any mistake made or a failed initiative. Management must accept that it cannot abdicate its responsibility for the failure, neither should it offer any sloppy or inappropriate excuses for the same.

There is a positive element to be derived from the fallout within an organization, where upon failure and any frequent mistakes have been recorded. To some, failures and frequent mistakes, help to identify the weaknesses within the management structure. This problem may have its genesis in the leadership and management style of individuals. Some leaders and management personnel are victims of the autocratic leadership style which they practise. Coupled with this would be the display of arrogance, a poor attitude, a show of disrespect and disregard for others and an unwillingness to listen. These factors combined, can be the basis for the crossing of ethical boundaries.

Unfortunately, it is not uncommon for such leaders and managers to accept credit readily when things go right. Usually, they are quick to remove themselves when failure occurs. This is enough to erode the confidence of members of staff and the public in the leadership and management of the organization. It boils down to a perception being created, that the actions of the leadership and management don’t match their words.

The disgrace and humiliation which some leaders and managers face and suffer, can be avoided if only they would adopt and present a more humane approach to the dealing with issues and people. Secondly and most importantly, leaders can demonstrate the essence of their professional character by accepting the truth and facts; despite that these may be hard to swallow.

It is advisable that in coping and managing any issue which has led to pressure being mounted as a result of a procedural failure, system failure or an error in judgement, leaders and managers ought to demonstrate their ability to effectively communicate. Admitting to failure is not a crime, but attempting to shift blame is unprincipled, unethical and dishonest. This is a case where two wrongs don’t make it right. The rebuilding of the confidence and trust of those impacted is always paramount. Confidence may never be regained, if in attempting to do so, the path is constricted by personal pride, arrogance and ignorance.

Dennis DePeiza is a labour & employee relations consultant, Regional Management Services Inc. www.regionalmanagementservices.com